combatarmsfandomcom-20200222-history
Forum:Weapon GIFs Restructuring
Support Oppose * I do not agree with the suggestions and I will explain each point individually and analytically. *#I don't like slideshows because they load .gifs very slow and the animations will look like a slow mo. Some users may have a laggy computer and they will be tired to look at the slow mos every transition. Furthermore, the slideshows transition too fast that I can't see the full animation. What if I want to stare at it and look at it longer because the animation looks cool? Do I have to keep pressing left arrow every 10 secs to see it again? *#*Suggestion: Leave the .gifs in a gallery, so all the animations will load all at once and users can look at the animations simultaneously and stare at it however as long as they wish. *#I do not agree with an individual section named animation. The media is what is named for: all the things that show how the gun is like in-game. A picture contains more than 1,000 words. What about animations? That's 1,000 words multiplied by the number of FPS = TONS OF WORDS. Furthermore, if this suggestion is in support, what about videos? Why can't videos have their own special individual sections? Poor videos. How about pictures? What will their new section be called? *#*Suggestion: There will be no new individual section for .gifs. Leave the .gifs in one gallery and pictures/screenshots in another gallery. This will look a bit more professional and user-friendy for many readers. The galleries will all go under the section Media. *#I do not agree with caption shortening. Why? Some users may have short term memory and forget what gun the .gif is referring to. They will have to scroll up and look at the title of the article to recall the name of the weapon again. Also, the long captions will keep the viewer reminded of the name of the gun. Another thing is guns in Combat Arms may look the same. Compare a M4A1 to an M16A3. They both look the same, and they both have similar animations. *#*Suggestion: The suggestion is very obvious, let the .gifs have long captioning. *#I do kind of partly agree with higher resolution .gifs, mainly because some users can't see well or looking at small things will hurt their eyes, but there is a problem. There are too many small .gifs to be deleted, and that will take a lot of time. Some older small .gifs are good and load fast, and really look like how it is like in-game. *#*Suggestion: Any small .gifs that are already on the wiki, leave it the way it is and do not change them. Instead, any new future .gifs will be required to have a higher resolution of the gun's animation or they will not be accepted and they will be subject to be deleted by an administrator. With all that said, I thank you for hearing my opinions and I hope that they will be taken into consideration. '- 'ComradeJ, Queen of Explosives. * as per the Queen of Bombs. EpaX (talk) 02:16, January 11, 2013 (UTC) Neutral *I'm just gonna stay in the middle and be sandwiched by the Support and Oppose. >.>; 07:13, Janurary 10, 2013 (UTC) *I'm fine with the outcome, though concerned that users with slower internet speeds may experience... 17:51, January 11, 2013 (UTC) Discussion *"Higher quality images" ... well, I could redo mine (that's going to be fun to do)... the only issue I'm not too sure on is the captions, do we really need the "-ing"? Blue August (talk) 21:49, January 10, 2013 (UTC) **Are we suppose to edit the template to vote? Blue August Blue August (talk) 22:13, January 10, 2013 (UTC) ***Should be Fixed now. Sorry, wasn't sure how it would be editable or not.